Portland school board bans climate change-denying materials

FieldingMellish

Suspended
Jun 20, 2010
2,440
3,079
0
rattle rattle blah blah. those lefty scientists make your life and your rambling possible. your car run your medicines and most other things. righty science thinks the world is 6k years old so why make it a better place. see easy to throw junk out without proof.
So silly you going off in unrelated directions, because point for point, what I wrote has been discussed on this board multiple times, except it's all the more damning seen in one paragraph.
 

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
0
85
Terlingua, Texas
Visit site
Personally, the idea of a warming trend appeals to me. I hate cold weather. Plus, warming increases the amount of arable land for grains in Canada and Russia. Might offset the coming reduction in grain production in the US from the mining of the Ogalalla aquifer.

Reducing CO2 production from our electric generating via not using coal, oil or natural gas leaves nukes, solar and wind as the alternatives. Short run ? Physically impossible. Long term? Probably less total generating capability. But the physical quality of life depends on electricity and transportation fuels.
 

Tmelon

macrumors 65816
Feb 26, 2011
1,065
435
0
I just wish we could find a happy medium between "climate change doesn't exist" and "climate change is the biggest epidemic on the planet and it's going to kill us all."
 

zioxide

macrumors 603
Dec 11, 2006
5,725
3,711
0
It's always the academic left, is it not?

The academic left is always looking to quash opposing points of view, be it a shouting down; an all-out prevention of speech by force, arriving at making common words and phrases verboten, preventing even the very presence of a conservative person, let alone the words; and in this thread's case, it stridently bans the opposition.
The "academic left". Lol, that's a new one.

Where's the "academic right"? Oh wait, they don't exist. They're too busy playing with fairy tales and ear plugs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: steve knight

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
0
85
Terlingua, Texas
Visit site
You'll find the academic left in the liberal arts colleges. Academic right in the hard sciences. However, in both cases, that's a "mostly".

But few conservatives in J-School or Political Science.
 

FieldingMellish

Suspended
Jun 20, 2010
2,440
3,079
0
The "academic left". Lol, that's a new one.

Where's the "academic right"? Oh wait, they don't exist. They're too busy playing with fairy tales and ear plugs.
There you go. An atheist heaping some hate on the religious out of the blue. It appears almost every thread's got some dollop of religion hate, but you almost never see it the other way around. The reason? Atheists hate and they cannot contain their hatred. It just has to bubble up and get expressed.
 

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
0
85
Terlingua, Texas
Visit site
Anybody here ever read about SCOTUS and the NeoNazis in Skokie, Illinois? They were allowed to march, regardless of the nastiness of the group. Based on that decision, the school board's edict is not in accord with the Constitution and the First Amendment.
 

jnpy!$4g3cwk

macrumors 65816
Feb 11, 2010
1,100
1,293
0
Anybody here ever read about SCOTUS and the NeoNazis in Skokie, Illinois? They were allowed to march, regardless of the nastiness of the group. Based on that decision, the school board's edict is not in accord with the Constitution and the First Amendment.
I'm not following you.

Maybe I'm missing something, but, the school board is saying keep the non-science out of the science curriculum. I'm not sure what that has to do with Nazis assembling peaceably.
 
  • Like
Reactions: old-wiz

Limey77

macrumors regular
Apr 22, 2010
103
974
0
I just wish we could find a happy medium between "climate change doesn't exist" and "climate change is the biggest epidemic on the planet and it's going to kill us all."
The trouble is that scientists have been trying his approach for 30+ years only to have people lie, cheat and forge evidence against them. Now everything they have been predicting is coming true and it is a huge issue. The last 7 months are the hottest on record for each and every month, we've just lost five islands in the Pacific and even Donald "I don't believe in climate change" Trump is building defences against rising sea levels for his precious golf courses.

If shouting at people is finally going to get them to listen then great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jnpy!$4g3cwk

Desertrat

macrumors newbie
Jul 4, 2003
2
706
0
85
Terlingua, Texas
Visit site
jnpy!$4g3cwk, to me the issue is one of outlawing disagreement, the creation of a "safe zone" against contrary views. That's why the Skokie decision was important: Government entities cannot avoid the airing of opposing views. Unconstitutional.

Please don't try to persuade me that PhDs in the atmospheric sciences are all irrational idiots if they interpret the data differently from the "approved" scientists. I've seen highly-qualified professionals use the same data for studies yet draw conclusions 180 degrees apart. Since the "blame it on people" group's view enables greater government control and therefore more grant money, at least a mild amount of suspicion seems justified. :)

Hard to know why people disagree with you, if you don't let them speak. Me, if somebody disagrees with my view, I want them to articulate rational reasons.
 

jnpy!$4g3cwk

macrumors 65816
Feb 11, 2010
1,100
1,293
0
jnpy!$4g3cwk, to me the issue is one of outlawing disagreement, the creation of a "safe zone" against contrary views. That's why the Skokie decision was important: Government entities cannot avoid the airing of opposing views. Unconstitutional.
Nobody is outlawing or denying your right to access (climate-change-)denial materials and to air denial views. Just your right to make them part of the science curriculum taught to children in schools. They should be taught about, in fact, in civics class, showing the power of money to influence politics.

Please don't try to persuade me that PhDs in the atmospheric sciences are all irrational idiots if they interpret the data differently from the "approved" scientists. I've seen highly-qualified professionals use the same data for studies yet draw conclusions 180 degrees apart.** Since the "blame it on people" group's view enables greater government control and therefore more grant money, at least a mild amount of suspicion seems justified. :)
You know, you've surely seen some of the TV shows about people good at detecting lies, e.g. Lie to Me, The Mentalist, etc. Seems to be a cliche' now all over TV these days.

Watch (in HD) Climate of Doubt, the 2012 Frontline episode on climate change. You tell me how many of the deniers shown, themselves think they are telling the truth, and how many think they themselves are not telling the truth. I particularly appreciated David Koch's appearance in the show.

Hard to know why people disagree with you, if you don't let them speak. Me, if somebody disagrees with my view, I want them to articulate rational reasons.
-- An aside about theories, hypotheses, settled science, etc. --

** What you are describing takes place in a very different way. For example, when scientists debate Darwin and Darwinian sexual selection, they aren't debating whether people rode around on dinosaurs backs. They aren't debating old-Earth Evolution. They are debating the subtleties of sexual reproduction and sexual selection, e.g. how and why same-sex attractions, or even why sexual reproduction exists. It has always been a scientifically tricky subject, and there is still a lot in that book to be written. Thermodynamics, on the other hand, is rather complete. How often do you see a cup of water spontaneously freeze? Debate in science is healthy; just don't be surprised or offended that no one is interested in "debating" thermodynamics.
[doublepost=1464472497][/doublepost]
Recently heard on Radio (NPR) that many conservatives acknowledge to global warming, many think is man caused, but will never admit under Democrat president.
At least, not a Muslim Kenyan Socialist Democratic President.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Renzatic

ctg7w6

macrumors 6502
Oct 23, 2014
328
487
0
I honestly don't know one way or the other... mostly because it's not a topic I particularly care all that much about. Nevertheless, the problem that is being encountered is the politicization of anthropogenic climate change. The politics behind it is tied to too much anti-Westernism. I'm all for the science (whichever way it goes), but not the Marxian crap that comes along with it.
 

steve knight

macrumors 68030
Jan 28, 2009
2,576
6,952
0
www.cncrouting.biz
It wouldn't make the government bigger, more like it'd make the government move support away from something they like (coal and gas industries), to something they don't (green initiatives).
but they fear it will make government and world government more powerful. it is fear that causes the denial.